Vote "innocent" on all black murders

[jimnyc]

Black Lawyer Calls on Black Jurors to Vote ‘Innocent’ for Any Black Person Accused of Murdering a White Person

An African-American lawyer and editor of a popular legal website is calling on all black jurors across the country to automatically vote to free any black person accused of murdering or committing a crime against a white person despite the evidence.
Elie Mystal, an editor and contributor to the law blog Above The Law, posted a December 7 article urging all black Americans who end up on juries to engage in “jury nullification” by automatically voting to acquit all blacks accused of crimes, especially that of murder, against white victims and to do so no matter how much evidence is brought to bear against the suspect.

Mystal justified this lawlessness by claiming that “African-Americans live in a world where the police can murder us and get away with it.”

“There is no justice for black people. And yet violently revolting against the system will get us nowhere,” he added.

This, Mystal says, is reason enough to work against the legal system in all areas.

Maybe it’s time for black people to use the same tool white people have been using to defy a system they do not consent to: jury nullification. White juries regularly refuse to convict or indict cops for murder. White juries refuse to convict vigilantes who murder black children. White juries refuse to convict other white people for property crimes. White juries act like the law is just a guideline and their personal morality (or lack thereof) should be controlling.

“Maybe it’s time minorities got in the game?” Mystal added.

Rest here - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/08/black-legal-expert-blacks-accused-murdering-whites-innocent/

[Noir]

Do American judges not direct a jury that a majority decision can be accepted if not all are able to agree?

[jimnyc]

Do American judges not direct a jury that a majority decision can be accepted if not all are able to agree?

All are different, but most need ALL to vote guilty - or it's not guilty. Get one person to disagree and you walk.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Do American judges not direct a jury that a majority decision can be accepted if not all are able to agree?

Methinks you missed the glaringly obvious negative to such a request/action.
That of deliberately nullifying justice in order to advance a racist based agenda and movement that favors the black race over all others( disregarding how much of that our court system already does for them with mere slaps on the wrists so often).
Yet blacks as a group have always considered the American based court system as not lenient enough to them, to suit their tastes- as in "letting them engage in crimes with very little or else no consequences".-Tyr

[Elessar]

Methinks you missed the glaringly obvious negative to such a request/action.
That of deliberately nullifying justice in order to advance a racist based agenda and movement that favors the black race over all others( disregarding how much of that our court system already does for them with mere slaps on the wrists so often).
Yet blacks as a group have always considered the American based court system as not lenient enough to them, to suit their tastes- as in "letting them engage in crimes with very little or else no consequences".-Tyr

That racist attorney should be dis-barred for his comments.

[pete311]

It's wrong, but it's also just one person. Lots of garbage on all sides and all colors.

[Black Diamond]

One of the Freddie Gray cops' cases was thrown out by a black judge. Other Freddie Gray cops were found not guilty by juries with blacks on them. I wonder if this lawyer consider those black on black crimes......

[jimnyc]

It's wrong, but it's also just one person. Lots of garbage on all sides and all colors.

Perhaps so, but a law blog allowed it to be posted, and how many folks will read this and actually do so? We may never know. Hopefully no one will listen. But just one nitwit can alter a murder decision if they do listen.

Can you imagine the reaction if this was stated by a white lawyer? It would be national news and it wouldn't be dismissed so easily.

[gabosaurus]

Can you imagine the reaction if this was stated by a white lawyer? It would be national news and it wouldn't be dismissed so easily.

If this was stated by a white lawyer, it wouldn't be on breitbart. :p

[jimnyc]

If this was stated by a white lawyer, it wouldn't be on breitbart. :p

Way to address the topic. Considering I've given you endless offers to prove things about Breitbart, and you couldn't do so - it's obvious that you're trolling.

Perhaps stay on topic next time and continue a discussion?

[Black Diamond]

Perhaps so, but a law blog allowed it to be posted, and how many folks will read this and actually do so? We may never know. Hopefully no one will listen. But just one nitwit can alter a murder decision if they do listen.

Can you imagine the reaction if this was stated by a white lawyer? It would be national news and it wouldn't be dismissed so easily.
Does the media have white guilt? Or are they just trying to sell commercial time?

[Noir]

All are different, but most need ALL to vote guilty - or it's not guilty. Get one person to disagree and you walk.

Well that seems like a poor system given only one memeber needs to be compromised.

[aboutime]

Well that seems like a poor system given only one memeber needs to be compromised.


Noir. Of course YOU would call it a poor system. But here in the USA. We have a constitution, and something called the JUDICIAL SYSTEM, where anyone accused of any crime is considered Innocent, until proven guilty.
It's our Jury system, where peers of the accused gets to listen to the charges, BEFORE anyone can declare them Guilty. If only One member disagree's. It's called a Hung Jury, and another trial is performed to protect the Innocence of the accused.
Too bad you think it's a poor system. How would you do in a COURT where you live?

[gabosaurus]

Way to address the topic. Considering I've given you endless offers to prove things about Breitbart, and you couldn't do so - it's obvious that you're trolling.
Perhaps stay on topic next time and continue a discussion?

I was staying on topic. You were just ignoring it. Just like you ignore my answers about the racist, sexist, anti-semitic breitbart site.
Here are just a few examples of how Bannon has succeeded the site's fortunately dead founder as new Joseph Goebbels:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/breitbart-headlines_us_5829ba13e4b060adb56f1bdb

[Elessar]

I was staying on topic. You were just ignoring it. Just like you ignore my answers about the racist, sexist, anti-semitic breitbart site.
Here are just a few examples of how Bannon has succeeded the site's fortunately dead founder as new Joseph Goebbels:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/breitbart-headlines_us_5829ba13e4b060adb56f1bdb

Huffington Post as a source? You are sinking very low.
Half those reporters cannot even write in proper English, and the Editors ignore mistakes.

Another Gabby red herring?:laugh:

[jimnyc]

I was staying on topic. You were just ignoring it. Just like you ignore my answers about the racist, sexist, anti-semitic breitbart site.
Here are just a few examples of how Bannon has succeeded the site's fortunately dead founder as new Joseph Goebbels:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/breitbart-headlines_us_5829ba13e4b060adb56f1bdb

Those are headlines, dumbass. Did you try actually READING?

Additionally, since you're sop smart - can you make the connection for me and show me where Bannon wrote any of that stuff to begin with? <--- and there's nothing wrong with those articles anyway, just comical watching you make a dummy of yourself by posting things without actually reading.

[gabosaurus]

Those are headlines, dumbass. Did you try actually READING?

Additionally, since you're sop smart - can you make the connection for me and show me where Bannon wrote any of that stuff to begin with? <--- and there's nothing wrong with those articles anyway, just comical watching you make a dummy of yourself by posting things without actually reading.

I actually read all of them.
As editor and publisher of breitbart, Bannon reads and approves of everything that goes on the website.
And if you feel there is nothing wrong with them, it means you approve of all the racist, sexist and anti-semitic content that appears.

[NightTrain]

I actually read all of them.
As editor and publisher of breitbart, Bannon reads and approves of everything that goes on the website.

Bannon is working with Trump.

Do try to keep up, mmmkay?

[jimnyc]

I actually read all of them.
As editor and publisher of breitbart, Bannon reads and approves of everything that goes on the website.
And if you feel there is nothing wrong with them, it means you approve of all the racist, sexist and anti-semitic content that appears.

Sure thing, idiot. I approve of every last sentence they have used. EVERY LAST ONE.

But you're still wrong. Always have been. All you can do is post jabs and that's it. Post a few paragraphs from each and every article with a headline there, each and EVERY one. SHOW US what is in there that holds the names you used. Actually WRITE and post things, several paragraphs for each one, and backup what you're saying. That should be at least 22 paragraphs, but not hard when the majority is copying/pasting. Of course you can write a sentence or two beneath each one supporting what you're saying.

If you refuse, and choose to go solely with pictures, well, then you know...

[jimnyc]

Bannon is working with Trump.

Do try to keep up, mmmkay?

She said she read each one - I say LIAR!! She can now prove herself correct though, the ball is in her hands...

[gabosaurus]

Bannon is working with Trump.

Do try to keep up, mmmkay?

Bannon still oversees breitbart. Which was a political arm of Trump during the campaign. Right down to the fundraising links and endorsements.

You might want to defrost your cranium before you attempt to respond. :rolleyes:

[jimnyc]

Bannon still oversees breitbart. Which was a political arm of Trump during the campaign. Right down to the fundraising links and endorsements.

You might want to defrost your cranium before you attempt to respond. :rolleyes:

What did you call NT??? Care to backup him still overseeing things?

----

On August 17, Stephen Bannon stepped down from his role as executive chairman at Breitbart to join the Trump campaign as its new CEO.

[jimnyc]

Bannon still oversees breitbart. Which was a political arm of Trump during the campaign. Right down to the fundraising links and endorsements.

You might want to defrost your cranium before you attempt to respond. :rolleyes:

I'll wait on your backing up those articles, which I doubt you will do, VERY highly..

[gabosaurus]

How do you account for the rabid pro-Trump stance of breitbart during the campaign? Bannon oversees breitbart the same way Trump controls his empire. You don't give up what you built.

[NightTrain]

Bannon still oversees breitbart. Which was a political arm of Trump during the campaign. Right down to the fundraising links and endorsements.

You might want to defrost your cranium before you attempt to respond. :rolleyes:

Bannon is Trump's Chief Strategist and Senior Counselor as of November 13.

He's not working at Breitbart, dummy.

Read up at Breitbart to get real news instead of those funny British papers you like to read.

How's that Kool Aid treating you?

[jimnyc]

How do you account for the rabid pro-Trump stance of breitbart during the campaign? Bannon oversees breitbart the same way Trump controls his empire. You don't give up what you built.

I'll be waiting for you to post all those articles with your input, or you can back off and be labeled a troll. Your choice. I'll be here waiting to respond.

[NightTrain]

Sure thing, idiot. I approve of every last sentence they have used. EVERY LAST ONE.

But you're still wrong. Always have been. All you can do is post jabs and that's it. Post a few paragraphs from each and every article with a headline there, each and EVERY one. SHOW US what is in there that holds the names you used. Actually WRITE and post things, several paragraphs for each one, and backup what you're saying. That should be at least 22 paragraphs, but not hard when the majority is copying/pasting. Of course you can write a sentence or two beneath each one supporting what you're saying.

If you refuse, and choose to go solely with pictures, well, then you know...

Well, that's odd.

Have you noticed an extreme reluctance to back herself up?

Why do you think that is, Jim?

[jimnyc]

Well, that's odd.

Have you noticed an extreme reluctance to back herself up?

Why do you think that is, Jim?

Because she tosses things out and prays it sticks.

I'm MORE than happy to have a small debate with her, as soon as she posts those articles, or a few paragraphs of each, with her supporting words - and then I reply in kind. If she isn't trolling, she will do so. OCA posted the EXACT article...

[aboutime]

Black Lawyer Calls on Black Jurors to Vote ‘Innocent’ for Any Black Person Accused of Murdering a White Person

An African-American lawyer and editor of a popular legal website is calling on all black jurors across the country to automatically vote to free any black person accused of murdering or committing a crime against a white person despite the evidence.
Elie Mystal, an editor and contributor to the law blog Above The Law, posted a December 7 article urging all black Americans who end up on juries to engage in “jury nullification” by automatically voting to acquit all blacks accused of crimes, especially that of murder, against white victims and to do so no matter how much evidence is brought to bear against the suspect.

Mystal justified this lawlessness by claiming that “African-Americans live in a world where the police can murder us and get away with it.”

“There is no justice for black people. And yet violently revolting against the system will get us nowhere,” he added.

This, Mystal says, is reason enough to work against the legal system in all areas.

Maybe it’s time for black people to use the same tool white people have been using to defy a system they do not consent to: jury nullification. White juries regularly refuse to convict or indict cops for murder. White juries refuse to convict vigilantes who murder black children. White juries refuse to convict other white people for property crimes. White juries act like the law is just a guideline and their personal morality (or lack thereof) should be controlling.

“Maybe it’s time minorities got in the game?” Mystal added.

Rest here - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/08/black-legal-expert-blacks-accused-murdering-whites-innocent/



FIRST....She should be DIS-BARRED, and SECOND...Arrested for Massive JURY TAMPERING. Talk about RACISTS? Maybe Obamaism drove her down the Al (NOTSO) Sharpton WEASEL HOLE.

[aboutime]

How do you account for the rabid pro-Trump stance of breitbart during the campaign? Bannon oversees breitbart the same way Trump controls his empire. You don't give up what you built.


gabby. I can answer your question IF...you promise to also tell us about how you became such a RABID Democrat, Liberal, Leftist, Progressive, Ignorant Shill for Hillary.
And, will you be honest with us, and tell us how you are related to Nancy Pelosi, who obviously gets her beauty secrets from YOU?